00180—How does Matthew Arnold evaluate Chaucer’s greatness?

Matthew Arnold is an admirer of Chaucer’s poetry.  He remarks that Chaucer’s power of fascination is enduring.  “He will be read far more generally than he is read now.”  The only problem that we come across is the difficulty of following his language.  Chaucer’s superiority lies in the fact that “we suddenly feel ourselves to be in another world”.  His superiority is both in the substance of his poetry and in the style of his poetry.  “His view of life is large, free, simple, clear and kindly.  He has shown the power to survey the world from a central, a human point of view.”  The best example is his Prologue to the Canterbury Tales.  Matthew Arnold quotes here the words of Dryden who remarked about it; “Here is God’s plenty”.  Arnold continues to remark that Chaucer is a perpetual fountain of good sense.  Chaucer’s poetry has truth of substance; “Chaucer is the father of our splendid English poetry.”   By the lovely charm of his diction, the lovely charm of his movement, he makes an epoch and founds a tradition.  We follow this tradition in Spenser, Shakespeare, Milton and Keats.  “In these poets we feel the virtue.”  And the virtue is irresistible.

In spite of all these merits, Arnold says that Chaucer is not one of greatest classics.  He has not their accent.  To strengthen his argument Arnold compares Chaucer with the Italian classic Dante.  Arnold says that Chaucer lacks not only the accent of Dante but also the high seriousness.  “Homer’s criticism of life has it, Shakespeare has it, Dante has it, and Shakespeare has it.”  Thus in his critical essay “The Study of Poetry” Matthew Arnold comments not only on the  merits of Chaucer’s poetry, but also on the short comings.  He glorifies Chaucer with the remark, “With him is born our real poetry.”

00081--Discuss Matthew Arnold's Touchstone Method of Criticism.

.

Audio Books

Matthew Arnold's Touchstone Method of Criticism was really a comparative system of criticism.  Arnold was basically a classicist.  He admired the ancient Greek, Roman and French authors as the models to be followed by the modern English authors.  The old English like Shakespeare, Spenser or Milton were also to be taken as models.  Arnold took selected passages from the modern authors and compared them with selected passages from the ancient authors and thus decided their merits.  This method was called Arnold's Touchstone Method.

            However, this system of judgement has its own limitations.  The method of comparing passage with a passage is not a sufficient test for determining the value of a work as a whole.  Arnold himself insisted that we must judge a poem by the 'total impression' and not by its fragments.  But we can further extend this method of comparison from passages to the poems as whole units.  The comparative method is an invaluable aid to appreciation of any kind of art.  It is helpful not merely thus to compare the masterpiece and the lesser work, but the good with the not so good, the sincere with the not quite sincere, and so on.
Audio Books

            Those who do not agree with this theory of comparative criticism say that Arnold is too austere, too exacting in comparing a simple modern poet with the ancient master poet.  It is not fair to expect that all hills may be Alps.  The mass of current literature is much better disregarded.  By this method we can set apart the alive, the vital, the sincere from the shoddy, the showy and the insincere.
FREE ONLINE TESTS

00177--What is Matthew Arnold’s estimate of Dryden and Pope? [Robert Burns/Thomas Gray/Chaucer]

“Dryden and Pope are not classics of our poetry; they are classics of our prose.”  This is how Arnold evaluates Dryden and Pope.  He gives Thomas Gray a greater position.  He says that Gray is our poetical classics of the 18^th century.  Along with the names of Dryden and Pope, Matthew Arnold mentions the name of Robert Burns.  Burns’ English poems are simple to read.  But the real Burns is of course in his Scotch poems.  His poems deal with Scotch way of life, scotch drinks, scotch religion and Scotch manners.  A Scotch man may be familiar with such things, but for an outsider these may sound personal.  For supreme practical success more is required.  In the opinion of Arnold, Burns comes short of the high seriousness of the great classics, something is wanting in his poetry.    In his comparative study Arnold gives Chaucer a better position.  The world of Chaucer is fairer, richer and more significant than that of Burns.

00178--Matthew Arnold on the Early Poetry of France

Matthew Arnold is of the view that England is much obliged to France in the field of poetry.  The early poetry of England is ‘indissolubly connected’ to the early French poetry.  In his opinion the 12^th and the 13^th centuries were the seed-time of all modern language and literature.  At that time the poetry of France had a clear predominance in Europe.  The romance-poetry of Europe is French.  It is the pride of French literature.  The romance-poetry was at its height in the middle age.  In the fourteenth century there came an English man who nourished on this poetry.  He got his words, rhyme and metre from this poetry.  Matthew Arnold names this person as Chaucer.  In fact Chaucer received the elements of the romantic poetry immediately, from the Italians, especially from Dante.  But the Italians got this stuff from the French.

00201--'Dover Beach' mourns the loss of faith in the modern times. OR Discuss the poem as an elegy on the spiritual degeneration in modern times. [Matthew Arnold] [English Literature free notes]

Mathew Arnold's 'Dover Beach' is a beautiful lyric which describes the helpless uncertainty and doubt of the Victorian period.  There was a gradual decline in man's faith in God and religion.  The Victorian mind was dazzled by the achievements of science and material progress.  Faced with this choice between the world of faith and the world of materialism, the Victorian found himself in a sad Plight.  In Dover Beach Mathew Arnold pictures this inability of man to make the right choice.  The poet uses the sea as a symbol to bring home this idea.

            The poem has a very beautiful setting.  It is a very peaceful quiet moonlit night at the Dover Beach.  The sea is calm and full.  The Dover cliff stands out glimmering and vast.  The night air is sweet.  The tides coming to the shore fling down pebbles on the stand with a clattering sound.  The poet watches this ceaseless action of the waves.  He listens to the rhythmic cadence of the waves and he detects the eternal note of sadness in it.

            The sad note is not only the poet's own personal feeling.  It is the universal note of sadness.  The poet now takes us back through history to the time of Sophocles.  He too listened to the sad music of the waves; it brought into his mind the miserable plight of humanity, its turbid ebb and flow.  Though the reference is to Sophocles, Arnold bridges the present with the past. 

            From the real sea Arnold now goes to the metaphorical sea.  It is the sea of faith.  It was once full, beautifully spread out and deep.  This sea of faith once encircled and protected the entire world's faith in God and religion sustained humanity in those days of glory.  The poet feels a sense of loss and utter despair as he looks on the dimly lit scene before him. 

            The sea of faith is no longer full.  It has receded with a long melancholy roar like the sea in front of him has receded exposing the pebbles and leaving the shore littered with shingles.  Arnold has in mind a society which has moved away from religious faith cherished in the past and is now torn between faith and the glamour of materialism.

            Arnold thinks that there is only one clear solution for man to get out of this dilemma.  It is the power of true love.  The last part of the poem thus reveals Arnold's abiding faith in the power of true love to console man when he is plunged in despair.

            The world of science and technology seems to be a dream world, so beautiful, so varied and so new.  The poet feels that there is no real joy and happiness in this world.  No joy, no light, no certitude, it is only a beautiful mirage.

            The poet is once again plunged in despair as he looks on the dimly lit sea scape.  The tide has receded so low that the sea shore seems to expand in to a vast dark plain.  The poet now visualizes ignorant armies clashing on this battle field.  They are in utter confusion and fight without knowing friend from foe.  Thus Arnold closes the poem giving us a terrifying picture of anarchy and futility. 

00082--Discuss Matthew Arnold's definition of poetry as 'Criticism of life.' OR Discuss Mathew Arnold's views on the relationship between poetry and morality.

.

Matthew Arnold defines poetry "as a criticism of life under the conditions fixed for such a criticism by the laws of poetic truth and poetic beauty."  He adds by saying that the future of poetry is immense because in poetry we will find an ever surer and surer stay.  The strongest part of our religion today is its unconscious poetry.
AUDIO BOOKS

            Quoting Wordsworth, he says that poetry is "the impassioned expression which is in the countenance of all science."  But these observations apply to the high and sublime poetry of high excellence.  High poetry has a power of 'forming, sustaining, and delighting us as nothing else can.' This kind of poetry is, therefore, essentially moral, not in the narrow didactic sense, but in the larger sense of conforming to the highest ideals of truth, goodness, and beauty.  In his essay on Wordsworth he says, "A poetry of revolt against moral ideas is a poetry of revolt against life; a poetry of indifference towards moral ideas is a poetry of indifference towards life."  But the term 'moral' should be used in its broadest sense, bearing upon the question 'how to live?'

.

.

00080--What, according to Matthew Arnold, are the basic functions of a literary critic?

            Matthew Arnold, himself a great critic, lays heavy responsibilities upon a literary critic.  He says that a critic is basically a teacher and he has a mission to fulfill, holding that literature is a 'criticism of life'.  The first duty of the critic, therefore, is to make "a disinterested endeavour to learn and propagate the best that is known and thought in the world, and thus to establish a current of fresh and true ideas."  This is the keynote of the task of a critic.  Arnold lays emphasis upon the word 'disinterested.'  The critic must be absolutely impartial without any prejudice or bias against or in favour of any particular author or literary school.  He must "see things as they really are."  The next function of the critic is to make the best ideas prevail."  In this respect the critic is a missionary.  Thereafter his next function is to prepare an atmosphere favourable for the production of creative literature.  He must promote "a current of ideas in the highest degree animating and nourishing to the creative power."  In his 'Culture and Anarchy' he says that the critic as a man of culture should be concerned with all aspects of living.  In brief, the function of the critic in the broadest sense of the term is to promote culture..... to promote that part of culture which depends upon knowledge of letters.  He is motivated by the 'moral and social passion for doing good."

00086--Point out the limitations of Matthew Arnold as a critic.

Mathew Arnold

                                       

There is no denying the fact that as a critic of literature, Arnold has well-marked limitations and short comings which may be listed as follows:

1.      He is incapable of connected reasoning at any length, and often contradicts himself.  Thus first he lays down the test of total impression for judging the worth of a poet, but soon after contradicts himself and prescribes the well-known Touchstone Method.

2.      There is a certain want of logic and method in Arnold's criticism.  He is not a scientific critic.  Often he is vague, and fails to define or state clearly his views.

3.      He frowns upon mere literary criticism.  He mixes literary criticism with socio-ethical consideration and regards it as an instrument of culture.  Pure literary criticism with him has no meaning and significance.

4.      There is some truth in the criticism that he was a propagandist and salesman.  As Wimsatt and Brooks point out, "very simply, very characteristically, and very repetitiously, Arnold spent his career in hammering the thesis that poetry is a "criticism of life".  All his practical criticism is but an illustration of this view.

5.      His criticism lacks originality.  Practically all of his critical concepts are borrowed.  In his emphasis on 'action' and 'high seriousness', he merely echoes Aristotle; his concept of "grand style" is exactly the same thing as "the sublime" of Longinus. 

6.      His learning is neither exact nor precise.  He does not collect his facts painstakingly.   His illustration of his ‘touch stone’ method is all misquotations.  Similarly, his biographical data are often inaccurate.

7.      He is in favour of biographical interpretation; he is also conscious of the importance of the moment", and yet he is against the historical method of criticism.

8.      He advocates "disinterestedness", but ties the critic to certain socio-ethical, interests.  He would like him to rise above "practical" and "personal" interests, but he wants him to establish a current of great and noble ideas and thus promote culture.  But disinterestedness means that the critic should have no interests except aesthetic appreciation.

9.      He speaks of the moral effects of poetry, of its "high seriousness", but never of its pleasure, the "aesthetic pleasure" which a poem must impart, and which is the true test of its excellence.  His standards of judgement are not literary.

His literary criticism is vitiated by his moral, classical and continental prejudices.  He is sympathetic only to the classics, he rates the continental poets higher than the great English poets, and the moral test which he applies often makes him neglect the literary qualities of a poet.  The immoral in a poets' life, prejudices him against his poetry.